5-1

5.0 COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 

5.1 SCOPING PROCESS

FRA initiated the scoping process by publishing a NOI to prepare a Program EIS/EIR 

in the Federal Register on August 17, 2012. FRA is the lead federal agency, working 

jointly with SLOCOG as the lead state agency. The two agencies have prepared this

program-level (Tier 1) EIS/EIR pursuant to NEPA and CEQA guidelines.

Two scoping meetings were held as a part of the scoping process as outlined in 

Table 5-1.

Table 5-1 Scoping Meetings

Salinas San Luis Obispo

Transportation Agency for Monterey County San Luis Obispo City/County Library

55-B Plaza Circle 995 Palm Street

August 28, 2012, 3:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. August 29, 2012, 3:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.

These meetings provided an opportunity for the public and agencies to comment on 

the scope of environmental topics that will be analyzed in the Program EIS/EIR.

Approximately 25 people attended the scoping meetings and/or submitted 

comments during the scoping period. Sign in sheets were provided for attendees 

with the option of including a mailing/email address so that they could be added to 

the project mailing list. This list will be used to update the public and appropriate 

agencies on further public outreach/involvement opportunities, and to provide 

further information concerning the proposed project. Scoping meeting attendees 

were provided with comment cards to submit their comments on the project, and 

copies of the presentation given were made available for interested parties.

Representatives from SLOCOG, TAMC and the consultant team presented an 

overview of the Coast Corridor Rail Project, its components, and its purpose and

need. They also discussed the environmental process and the issues to be studied 

in the Program EIS/EIR. Preceding and following the presentation, attendees were 

welcomed to take part in an open house informal discussion of the project and 
Coast Corridor

5.0 Comments and Coordination Draft Program EIS/EIR

5-2

review process with team members at various information stations with exhibit 

boards and aerial overview maps.

5.2 OTHER SCOPING MEETING NOTIFICATION

Federal Register/Notice of Intent

FRA published a notice of intent in the Federal Register on August 17, 2012.

Newspaper

Notices to the public briefly describing the proposed project and listing the dates 

and locations of the scoping meetings were published in local newspapers. These 

publications included the Salinas Californian (August 21, 2012), the San Luis Obispo 

Tribune (August 22, 2012) and El Sol (August 25, 2012). El Sol is a Spanish-language 

newspaper published in Salinas that covers Salinas and Monterey County. 

Mailing

Over 6,000 postcard meeting notifications in both English and Spanish were 

distributed to residents within 500 feet of the corridor and 1,000 feet of the 

proposed new railroad stations (Soledad and King City). These mailers gave a brief 

explanation of the project and provided details on the dates, times, and locations of 

the Scoping Meetings. 

5.3 FORMAL COMMENT SUMMARY

Scoping Meeting attendees were provided with comment sheets at the meeting and 

were asked to submit them that day or mail them to SLOCOG (1114 Marsh Street, 

San Luis Obispo, CA 93401) or via email to 

coastcorridorscopingcomments@circlepoint.com by close of business September 

10, 2012. All comments and questions, including those delivered orally at one of the 

scoping meetings and those provided in writing, are summarized and responded to 

below (Tables 5-2 and 5-3).
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 5.0 Comments and Coordination

5-3

Table 5-2 August 28th– Salinas

Questions/Comments Disposition Response

Is this a real project? Has funding been identified?

Project attributes and anticipated potential funding 

strategies will be discussed in the EIS/EIR - see 

discussion of Build Alternative, Chapter 2.0, 

Alternatives

Does the Federal government have some minimum 

level of projects that need to be approved?

The EIS/EIR will discuss all pertinent regulatory 

requirements. There is no minimum level of 

improvements that must be implemented. 

How much will the ticket be from Salinas to San 

Francisco? San Francisco to Los Angeles?

Estimated fare information was not available as of the 

drafting of this EIS/EIR.

Table 5-3 August 29th– San Luis Obispo

Questions/Comments Disposition Response

Would you consider re-instituting the use of 

sidings—currently many are used for excess rail car 

storage. This is unsightly, and being used as a 

parking lot.

The Alternatives section of the EIS/EIR will describe all 

project components and how they were developed.

Besides the Cuesta Grade, what other curves are 

we looking at?

The Alternatives section of the EIS/EIR will describe all 

project components and how they were developed. 

Several other curve corrections are noted; the Cuesta 

area is the only segment where substantial second 

track is programmed.

Do we have the authority to take property via 

eminent domain?

The EIS/EIR will discuss the subsequent analyses and 

permits anticipated to be necessary for project 

implementation, including any needed land 

acquisition. As described in Chapter 2.0, Alternatives, 

the extent of actual improvements to be implemented 

is not yet known, so the need for any specific property 

acquisition has not yet been determined. 

Will the fiber optic cable that was laid a number of 

years ago be considered or disturbed?

The EIS/EIR will consider effects to existing utilities in 

the rail corridor, including communications 

infrastructure. See Section 3.8, Public Utilities and 

Services

Is the April 2015 service date firm?

The EIS/EIR will clarify anticipated project timeframes. 

The final EIS/EIR is likely to be published in early 2015. 

Updated projections on service dates will be provided 

as feasible.
Coast Corridor

5.0 Comments and Coordination Draft Program EIS/EIR

5-4

Questions/Comments Disposition Response

What is the status of implementing positive train 

control? Will it be required?

The Alternatives section of the EIS/EIR will describe all 

of the anticipated improvements.

What website will you use to provide updates? www.slocog.org

Does the train own an easement next to the tracks?

The EIS/EIR will discuss the subsequent analyses and 

permits anticipated to be necessary for project 

implementation, including any needed land 

acquisition.

I would like to see a parallel bike path and trail. The comment is noted.

Amtrak & UPRR—since UPRR is such a disinterested 

partner, why force the issue? Highway 101 has a 

good amount of Right of Way for an elevated train 

up the middle of the highway.

The Alternatives section of the EIS/EIR will describe all 

of the anticipated improvements and their anticipated 

locations. This section will also discuss alternatives 

briefly considered but ultimately rejected from further 

analysis.

There is much to accomplish in terms of planning 

and actual work on the Coast Corridor. Eagerly 

awaiting the start of the Coast Daylight.

The comment is noted.

Pleased to see that much needed improvements 

will be made. These will serve residents and 

tourists.

The comment is noted.

This project is much needed, and adding stations 

between SLO and Salinas would be okay, but there 

should be at least one daily express run up and 

down the coast each way that skips most other 

stops.

The comment is noted.

5.4 STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH

As part of the public involvement and outreach process for the Coast Corridor Rail 

Project environmental review, consultants assisting SLOCOG, TAMC, and Caltrans on 

the project made efforts to conduct project briefings with agencies and other 

stakeholders prioritized by SLOCOG and its partners. Below is a summary of 

briefings conducted between August 2012 and November 2012. Also identified are 

agencies that were contacted who did not wish to receive a briefing, or did not 

respond to inquiries.
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 5.0 Comments and Coordination

5-5

City of Soledad

A briefing with the Community and Economic Development Director of the City of 

Soledad was held in-person on August 28, 2012. Discussion topics included: the City 

of Soledad Downtown Specific Plan, station location, potential agriculture impacts if 

any access across the tracks is eliminated. 

City of King

A briefing with the Community Development Director and staff was conducted inperson on August 29, 2012. Discussion topics included: purpose/result of the Draft 

Program EIS/EIR, coordination with Fort Hunter-Liggett, coordination with existing 

downtown planning efforts, coordination with UPRR, existing RailPro study. King 

City staff indicated concerns about the following topics: Greenhouse Gas emissions, 

multi-modal element, and the potential impact on commute patterns. King City 

staff also encouraged making the Draft Program EIS/EIR accessible to Spanish 

speakers, if feasible. 

Monterey County Farm Bureau

A briefing was held via teleconference and webinar with the Monterey County Farm 

Bureau on October 17, 2012. Discussion topics included impacts to station 

locations, alignments, the environmental process schedule and impacts to 

agricultural land. The Farm Bureau reported at the end of the briefing that this 

information about the project was “not as alarming” as they had expected. They 

look forward to continued involvement in the project moving forward. 

U.S. Army/Fort Hunter Liggett

A briefing was conducted via teleconference/webinar with command staff at Fort 

Hunter Liggett on November 13, 2012. Fort Hunter Liggett was not on the initial list 

of stakeholders, given its distance (20+ miles) from the corridor and the proposed 

King City station. However, staff at the City of King strongly urged outreach to Fort 

command staff. Discussion topics included train schedules and the location of the 

train station in San Francisco, and the potential for Coast Corridor service to connect

with airports in San Jose and Burbank as a means of expanding access to and from 

the Fort. The stakeholders are supportive of the project and look forward to 

receiving project updates. 

San Luis Obispo Farm Bureau

Contact attempts were made to the San Luis Obispo Farm Bureau, but were not 

returned. 
Coast Corridor

5.0 Comments and Coordination Draft Program EIS/EIR

5-6

Others Contacted but Declined Briefings

We have reached out to the following groups and found out that they were not 

interested in obtaining more information about the Coast Corridor Rail Project:

 Salinas Valley Chamber

 San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce

 San Luis Obispo County Agricultural Commissioner

No Response

We also reached out to the following agencies to offer a briefing on the project, but 

did not receive a response:

 California Department of Fish and Wildlife

 United States Forest Service: Santa Lucia unit of Los Padres National Forest1

5.5 TRIBAL OUTREACH

The project team performed a Sacred Lands File and Native American Contacts List 

Request through the NAHC. On July 1, 2013, the NAHC responded to the records 

search, noting that the search indicated the possible presence of Native American 

traditional cultural place(s) in the proposed project area. As such, the NAHC 

recommended that tribal governments and individuals be contacted to determine 

potential impact of any cultural place(s), and follow up within two weeks of initial 

contact via telephone call. The NAHC provided contact information for 25 

individuals from several tribal organizations traditionally affiliated with lands in the 

project area.

In response to the NAHC’s request, and pursuant to Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800.2(c)(2)(ii)) the lead Federal agency, FRA, 

reached out to the identified individuals to advise about the project. 

Initial contact was made via letter, sent certified mail on September 17, 2013. As 

recommended by the NAHC, the project team made follow up phone calls to the 

tribal government contacts on September 24, 2013. All answered calls indicated 

receipt of FRA’s letter. 

 

1

As noted in Chapter 4, in August 2014 the consultant team preparing this document sought and 

obtained information from a ranger within US Forest Service regarding land uses in the vicinity of the 

Cuesta Grade/proposed second main line. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 5.0 Comments and Coordination

5-7

5.6 OTHER AGENCY OUTREACH

The project team has worked closely with the California State Historical Preservation 

Officer (SHPO) to ensure that all necessary outreach processes are taken to ensure 

the mitigation of any potential historical lands disruption. 

Agency Conference Calls and Correspondence

 Conference Call with FRA and Circlepoint, November 7, 2013

 Delivered updated outreach efforts report per SHPO’s June recommendations.

 Email Correspondence with Circlepoint: October 3, 2013

 SHPO acknowledged receipt of 9/3/2013 FRA letter initiating Section 106 

consultation.

Conference Call with Circlepoint, June 27, 2013

 Discussed the background, purpose & need, and key stakeholders of the 

project, as well as the Tier 1 EIS/EIR. 

 Project team requested SHPO feedback on appropriate parameters for the 

Cultural Records search; SHPO supported 1⁄4 mile buffer zone around project 

alignment as appropriate boundary for cultural resources analysis. 

 SHPO expressed importance of conducting NAHC consultation as early as 

possible.

5.7 DRAFT PROGRAM EIS/EIR DISTRIBUTION LIST

All persons, agencies, and organizations listed below have been informed of the 

availability of and locations to obtain the Draft Program EIS/EIR, as well as the 

timing of the public review period. Libraries listed below have received both 

hardcopy and electronic copies of the Draft Program EIS/EIR document and 

appendices. Federal, state, and local agencies and other officials and organizations 

listed below have received a hard copy of the Summary and electronic copies of the 

document and appendices. All other people (approximately 6000 addresses along 

the Corridor) have been mailed a notification that includes information on how to 

obtain a copy of the Draft Program EIS/EIR, the timing for the public comment 

period, and notice on public hearing dates, times, and locations. This information 

was also conveyed in both English and Spanish language newspapers in the Corridor 

(the Salinas Californian, El Sol, and the San Luis Obispo Tribune. 
Coast Corridor

5.0 Comments and Coordination Draft Program EIS/EIR

5-8

5.7.1 LIBRARY LOCATIONS

Monterey County 

Salinas Public Library, 350 Lincoln Avenue, Salinas, CA 93901

Gonzales Branch Library, 851 5th Street, Gonzales, CA 93926

Soledad Branch Library, 401 Gabilan Drive, Soledad, CA 93960

Greenfield Branch Library, 315 El Camino Real, Greenfield, CA 93927

San Luis Obispo County 

Paso Robles City Library, 1000 Spring Street, Paso Robles, CA 93446

Atascadero Public Library, 6850 Morro Road, Atascadero, CA 93422

San Luis Obispo City/County Library, 995 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

5.7.2 FEDERAL AGENCIES

U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo

U.S Department of Army, Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, Los Angeles

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, San Francisco & Washington, D.C.

5.7.3 STATE AGENCIES

California Department of Transportation, Chief Deputy Director, Sacramento

California Department of Transportation, District 5, San Luis Obispo

California Environmental Protection Agency, Secretary for Environmental 

Protection, Sacramento

California Department of Fish and Wildlife

California State Parks

California State Water Resources Control Board

5.7.4 ELECTED OFFICIALS

Federal Elected Officials

The Honorable Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator for California

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, U.S. Senator for California

The Honorable Sam Farr, 20th Congressional District

The Honorable Lois Capps, 24th Congressional District

State Elected Officials

The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor

The Honorable Bill Monning, 17th Senate District

The Honorable Luis Alejo, 30th Assembly District

The Honorable Katcho Achadjian, 35th Assembly District
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 5.0 Comments and Coordination

5-9

County and Local Officials

Mr. Louis Calcagno, Chair, Monterey County Board of Supervisors

Mr. Bruce Gibson, Chair, San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors

Mayors of Corridor Cities

The Honorable Mayor Joe Gunter, Salinas

The Honorable Mayor John Huerta, Greenfield

The Honorable Mayor Maria Orozco, Gonzales

The Honorable Mayor Fred Ledesma, Soledad

The Honorable Mayor Robert Cullen, King City

The Honorable Mayor Duane Picanco, Paso Robles

The Honorable Mayor Tom O’Malley, Atascadero

The Honorable Mayor Jan Howell Marx, San Luis Obispo

5.7.5 REGIONAL AND LOCAL AGENCIES

Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC)

Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG)

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District

Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST)

San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)

San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLO APCD)

San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority

Coast Rail Coordinating Council

5.7.6 ORGANIZATIONS

Amtrak, Public and Governmental Affairs, Oakland

Planning and Conservation League, Sacramento

Rail Passenger Association of California, San Francisco

Train Riders Association of California, Sacramento

Union Pacific Railroad, Sacramento
Coast Corridor

5.0 Comments and Coordination Draft Program EIS/EIR

5-10

Page Intentionally Left Blank